Are Games Art?

The question of whether or not something qualifies as art is silly; it accomplishes very little, and in the end is entirely subjective. For the purposes of this exploration, we’ll go with a standard definition and go from there:

art [1]

[ahrt]

noun

1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria.

It seems clear to me that video games can be beautiful, appealing, and remarkably significant. Hell, even looking at a game’s programing can have a sense of beauty in its structure and chaotic order. And if there are game critics who can rate and score one game over another, it seems logical that games can be subject to aesthetic criteria. Ergo, games can be art.

My own definition of art is even broader: “Art is anything that’s made to elicit a response.” Under that banner, almost anything can qualify, from paintings and tattoos, to obscene gestures and armpit farts. The question, for me at least, becomes, “Is this art effective?” If there was a specific emotion transmitted by the creator, was it received effectively by the participant? Is the emotion from this artwork something I value? I’m also more likely to consider something as artistic if it required more skill to execute, or if the desired emotional response was achieved as succinctly as possible.

Following this personal definition, games almost certainly classify as art, even the not-so-great ones. Most games today have a lot of creative effort put into them from multiple passionate people in multiple departments, and across multiple disciplines, most of whom (I assume) want to create something meaningful for the people who play it. Those creative choices throughout a game’s gestation are enough, in my opinion, to birth a work of art, good or bad.

On the question of whether or not games should be copyrighted, I think it becomes an issue of fairness vs. abuse. I would hope that game creators are allowed time under copyright law to recoup their investments without fear of copycats and blatant piracy. I would also hope that those same creators wouldn’t abuse copyright laws and keep familiar stories or ideas from being explored and reevaluated.

There have been many examples from the music and film industries that illustrate the potential benefits and harm of copyright, from Warner/Chappell’s abuse of the “Happy Birthday” song, to Vanilla Ice’s uncleared sample of Queen’s “Under Pressure”. The video game industry would be wise to learn from others’ mistakes in establishing fairness in copyright laws that also allow for flexibility and the freedom for new developers to explore.

While copyright laws can be helpful, I think the game industry has a unique opportunity to simply police itself. Because the industry is still young, most developers have intimate roots in gaming, and have a sincere passion for the industry that hasn’t yet suffered the way the film and music industries have since their beginnings. If game creators can resolve copyright conflicts before lawyers get involved by incentivizing good business and creative originality, perhaps we can avoid blatant copyright violations amongst ourselves.